Advertisement

Journal of Forestry Research

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 749–760 | Cite as

Carbon stock in Korean larch plantations along a chronosequence in the Lesser Khingan Mountains, China

  • Wei Ma
  • Yan-hong LiuEmail author
  • Yu-jun Sun
  • Jason Grabosky
Original Paper

Abstract

Carbon (C) dynamics are central to understanding ecosystem restoration effects within the context of Grain for Green Project (GGP). GGP stared in China since 2003 to improve the environment. Despite its importance, how total forest ecosystem C stock (FECS) develops following land-use changes from cropland to plantation is poorly understood, in particular the relationship of C allocation to pools. We quantified C pools in a chronosequence ranging from 0 to 48 years, using complete above- and below-ground harvests based on detailed field inventory. Stands were chosen along a succession sequence in managed plantations of Korean larch (Larix olgensis Henry.), a native planting species in the Lesser Khingan Mountains, Northeast of China. The FECS of Korean larch plantation (KLP) were dynamic across stand development, changing from 88.2 Mg·ha−1 at cropland, to 183.9 Mg·ha−1 as an average of forest C from 7-through 48-year-old plantation. In a 48-year-old mature KLP, vegetation comprises 48.63% of FECS and accounts for 67.66% of annual net C increment (ANCI). Soil is responsible for 38.19% and 13.53% of those, and with the remainders of 13.18% and 18.81% in down woody materials. Based on comparisons of our estimate to those of others, we conclude that afforestation of Korean larch plantation is a valid approach to sequester carbon.

Keywords

Korean larch plantation forest ecosystem carbon stock chronosequence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adrien CF, David JPM, Evan HD, John L, Kirsten SH, Robert BJ, Hyun SK, Roser M, Heather RM, Ram O, Jeffrey SP, William HS. 2006. Progressive nitrogen limitation of ecosystem processes under elevated CO2 in a warm-temperature forest. Ecology, 87(1): 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albaugh TJ, Allen HL, Doughtery PM, Johnsen KH. 2004. Long term growth responses of loblolly pine to optimal nutrient and water resource availability. Forest Ecol Manag, 192: 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechtold WA, Patterson PL (Eds.). 2005. The enhanced forest inventory and analysis program—national sampling design and estimation procedures. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-80. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC.Google Scholar
  4. Bert D, Danjon F. 2006. Carbon concentration variations in the roots, stem and crown of mature Pinus pinaster (Ait.). Forest Ecol Manag, 222: 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Birdsey RA, Lewis GM. 2003. Carbon in U.S. forests and wood products, 1987–1997: state-by-state estimates. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-310. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 42 pGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonan GB. 2008. Forests and climate change: forcing, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science, 320(5882): 1444–1449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradford JB, Weishampel P, Smith ML, Kolka R, Birdsey RA, Ollinger SV, Ryan MG. 2009. Detrital carbon pools in temperate forests: magnitude and potential for landscape-scale assessment. Can J For Res, 39: 802–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown S, Swingland IR, Hanbury TR, Prance GT, Myers N. 2002. Changes in the use and management of forests for abating carbon emissions: issues and challenges under the Kyoto Protocol. Philos. Trans. Math Phys Eng Sci, 360(1797): 1593–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown S. 2002. Measuring, monitoring, and verification of carbon benefits for forest-based projects. Phil Trans R Soc London Ser A: Math Phys Eng Sci, 360: 1669–1683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canadell JG, Le QC, Raupach MR, Field CB, Buitenhuis ET, Ciais P, Conway TJ, Gillett NP, Houghton RA, Marland G. 2007. Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks Proc. Natl Acad Sci, 104(47): 66–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cao W, Li JY. 2007. Flora and distribution in Lesser Khingan Mountains, China. Beijing: Science Press (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  12. Carolina MR, Belén FS. 2005. Natural revegetation on topsoiled mining-spoils according to the exposure. Acta Oecologica, 28: 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Catharina JE, Schulp GN, Peter HV, Rein WW. 2008. Effect of tree species on carbon stocks in forest floor and mineral soil and implications for soil carbon inventories. Forest Ecol Manag, 256: 482–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chastain JRA, Currie WS, Townsend PA. 2006. Carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling implications of the evergreen understory layer in Appalachian forests. Forest Ecol Manag, 231: 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen CG, Zhu JF. 1989. Biomass manual of main trees in northeastern China. Beijing: China Forestry Press, 528 p (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  16. Chen XL. 2003. Researches on carbon sequestration functions of main forest types in northern China. Doctoral Thesis: Beijing Forestry University (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  17. David MS, Bruce CL, Matthew JK, Mark SAP. 1997. The Practice of Silviculture: Applied Forest Ecology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..Google Scholar
  18. DeGryze S, Six J, Paustian K, Morris SJ, Paul EA, Merckx R. 2004. Soil organic carbon pool changes following land-use conversions. Global Change Biology, 10: 1120–1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Drewry JJ, Cameron KC, Buchan GD. 2008. Pasture yield and soil physical property responses to soil compaction from treading and grazing — a review. Aust J Soil Res, 46: 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Du HM, Wang C, Gao HZ. 2009. Carbon-sink function of artificial Larix principis — rupprechtii plantation. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 17(4): 756–759. (In Chinese with English abstract)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dixon RK, Brown S, Houghton RA. 1994. Carbon pols and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science, 263: 185–190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Erb KH. 2004. Land-use related changes in aboveground carbon stocks of Austrias terrestrial ecosystems. Ecosystems, 7: 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. FAO. 2010. Global forest resources assessment. FAO Forestry Paper 163. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  24. Feng RF, Yang WQ, Zhang J. 2006. Artificial forest management for global change mitigation. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 26(11): 3870–3877 (In Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  25. Grace J. 2004. Understanding and managing the global carbon cycle. J Ecol, 92(2): 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodale CL, Apps MJ, Birdsey RA, Field CB, Heath LS, Houghton RA, Jenkins JC, Kohlmaier GH, Kurz W, Liu SR, Nabuurs, GJ, Nilsson S, Shvidenko AZ. 2002. Forest carbon sinks in the Northern Hemisphere. Ecol Appl, 12: 891–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gorte RW. 2009. Carbon Sequestration in Forests. Congressional Research Service [online] [viewed on September 12, 2011]. Available on the Internet: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31432.pdf Google Scholar
  28. Guo LB, Gifford RM. 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis. Global Change Biology, 8: 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heath LS, Smith JE, Skog KE, Nowak DJ, Woodall CW. 2011. Managed forest carbon estimates for the US greenhouse gas inventory, 1990–2008. Journal of Forestry, 109(3): 167–173.Google Scholar
  30. Heleen AD, Sheila K. 1999. Carbon stocks in Norwegian forest soils and effects of forest management on carbon storage. Rapport fra skogforskningen (Supplement 14): 52 s.Google Scholar
  31. Hooker TD, Compton JE. 2003. Forest ecosystem carbon and nitrogen accumulation during the first century after agricultural abandonment. Ecological Applications, 13: 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hudiburg T, Law B, Turner DP, Campbell J, Donato D, Duane M. 2009. Carbon dynamics of Oregon and Northern California forests and potential land-based carbon storage. Ecological Applications, 19(1):163–180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. IPCC. 2006. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Vol.2. Edited by S Eggleston, L Buendia, K Miwa, T Ngara and K Tanabe (Japan: IGES). Available at: www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html (26 Sep. 2010)
  34. Jandl R, Lindner M, Vesterdal L, Bauwens B, Baritz R, Hagedorn F, Johnson DW, Minkkinen K, Byrne KA. 2007. How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration?. Geoderma, 137: 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jiang YL, Zhou GS. 2002. Carbon balance of Larix gmelinii forest and impacts of management practices. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 26(3): 317–322. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  36. Johnson MG, Kern JS. 2003. Quantifying the organic carbon held in forested soils of the United States and Puerto Rico. In: Kimble JM, Heath LS, Birdsey RA, Lal R (Eds.), The Potential of U.S. Forest Soils to Sequester Carbon and Mitigate the Greenhouse Effect. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 47–72.Google Scholar
  37. Johnson D, Todd D, Tolbert V. 2003. Change in ecosystem carbon and nitrogen in a Loblolly pine plantation over the first 18 years. Soil Science Society America Journal, 67: 1594–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jobbagy EG, Jackson RB. 2002. The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation. Ecological Applications, 10(2): 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. John L, Sharon AB, Susan EZ, Deeya G, Rebecca R, Adrien CF, Robert BJ, Elizabeth AS, William HS. 2008. Soil carbon sequestration in a pine forest after 9 years of atmospheric CO2 enrichment. Global Change Biology, 14: 1–13.Google Scholar
  40. King JS, Giardina CP, Pregitzer KS, Friend AL. 2007. Biomass partitioning in red pine (Pinus resinosa) along a chronosequence in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Can J For Res, 37(1): 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lal R. 1999. Soil management and restoration for C sequestration to mitigate the accelerated greenhouse effects. Progress in Environmental Science, 1(4): 307–326.Google Scholar
  42. Magnani F, Mencuccini M, Borghetti M, Berbigier P, Berninger F, Delzon S, Grelle A, Hari P, Jarvis PG, Kolari P, Kowalski AS, Lankreijer H, Law BE, Lindroth A, Loustau D, Manca G, Moncrieff JB, Rayment M, Tedeschi V, Valentini R, Grace J. 2007. The human footprint in the carbon cycle of temperate and boreal forests. Nature, 447: 849–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Man XL, Liu B, Li Y. 2010. Distribution characteristics of organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in the soils of herbaceous peat swamps in the Xiaoxing’an Mountains. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 32(6): 48–53. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  44. Meelis SMScF. 2009. Carbon dynamics of boreal mixed woods in central Canada. Lakehead University.Google Scholar
  45. Mund M, Kummetz E, Hein M, Bauer GA, Schulze ED. 2002. Growth and carbon stocks of a spruce in central Europe. Forest Ecol Manag, 171: 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oscar JC, Russell MW, Kenneth GM. 2004. Carbon monitoring costs and their effect on incentives to sequester carbon through forestry. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 154: 273–293.Google Scholar
  47. Paul K, Polglase P, Nyakuengama J, Khanna P. 2002. Change in soil carbon following afforestation. Forest Ecol Manag, 168: 241–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pibumrung P, Gajaseni N, Popan A. 2008. Profiles of carbon stocks in forest, reforestation and agricultural land, Northern Thailand. Journal of Forestry Research, 19(1): 11–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pregitzer KS. 2003. Carbon cycling in forest ecosystems with an emphasis on belowground processes. In: The potential of U.S. forest soils to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla. pp. 93–107Google Scholar
  50. Richardson J, Björheden R, Hakkila P, Lowe AT, Smith CT (Eds.). 2002. Bioenergy from Sustainable Forestry: Guiding Principles and Practices. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  51. Romanya J, Cortina J, Falloon P, Coleman K, Smith P. 2000. Modeling changes in soil organic matter after planting fast growing Pinus radiata on Mediterranean agricultural soils. Eur J Soil Sci, 51: 627–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Robert CM, Douglas GF. 1991. A review of the role of temperate forests in the global CO2 balance. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, 41(6): 798–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sang WG, Su HX, Chen LZ. 2002. Coupling biomass and energy in warm temperate deciduous broad-leaved Oak (Quercus liao tungensis) forest ecosystem. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 26(S1): 88–92. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  54. Schwarze R, Niles JO, Olander J. 2002. Understanding and managing leakage in forest-based green house gas-mitigation projects. Philos Trans Math Phys Eng Sci, 360(1797): 1685–1704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shen ZK, Lu SP, Ai XR. 2005. Study on biomass and productivity of Larix Kaempferi Plantation. Journal of Hubei Institute for Nationalities, 23(3): 289–292. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  56. Silver WL, Kueppers LM, Lugo AE, Ostertag R, Matzek V. 2004. Carbon sequestration and plant community dynamics following reforestation of tropical pasture. Ecological Applications, 14(4): 1115–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Skog KE, Pingoud K, Smith JE. 2004. A method countries can use to estimate changes in carbon stored in harvested wood products and the uncertainty of such estimates. Environmental Management, 33(S1): 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smith JE, Heath LS. 2002. A model of forest floor carbon mass for United States forest types. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, NE-RP-722, NewtownGoogle Scholar
  59. Square, PA Smith JE, Heath LS, Skog KE, Birdsey RA. 2006. Methods for calculating forest ecosystem and harvested carbon with standard estimates for forest types of the United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-343. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 216 pGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith JE, Heath LS. 2008. Carbon stocks and stock changes in U.S. forests. In: U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S. Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990–2005. Technical Bulletin No. 1921. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief Economist: 65–80, C1-C7Google Scholar
  61. Stinson G, Kurz WA, Smyth CE, Neilson ET, Dymond CC, Metsaranta JM, Boisvenue C, Rampley GJ, Li Q, White TM, Blain D. 2011. An inventory-based analysis of Canada’s managed forest carbon dynamics, 1990 to 2008. Global Change Biology, 17: 2227–2244.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Susan T. 2000. Age of soil organic matter and soil respiration: radiocarbon constraints on belowground C dynamics. Ecological Applications, 10: 399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Susan T, Enir SDC, Daniel CN, Plinio BDC, Luiz AM, David R, Teresa R, Whendee S. 2006. Dynamics of fine root carbon in Amazonian tropical ecosystems and the contribution of roots to soil respiration. Global Change Biology, 12: 217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tobias K, Pontus O, Oleh C, Matthias B, Katarzyna O, Curtis EW, Richard AH, Patrick H, William SK, Volker CR. 2010. Post-Soviet cropland abandonment, forest recovery, and carbon sequestration in western Ukraine. Global Change Biology, 17(3): 1335–1349.Google Scholar
  65. Tolunay D. 2009. Carbon concentrations of tree components, forest floor and understorey in young Pinus sylvestris stands in north-western Turkey, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 24(5): 394–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. UNFCCC. 2011. Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry, Draft Decision /CMP.6 Available at: http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/cop16/application/pdf/cop16lulucf.pdf)Google Scholar
  67. USDA Forest Service. 2007. Forest Inventory and Analysis National Core Field Guide, version 4.0. Available at: http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc (28 Apr. 2008)Google Scholar
  68. USDA Forest Service. 2011. Forest inventory and analysis national core field guide; Phase 3 field guide, Down Woody Materials. Version 5.0. St. Paul, MN. Available at http://fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc/docs/ (18 Oct. 2011)Google Scholar
  69. USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN. US EPA. 2005. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990–2003. EPA 430-R-05-003. Available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/ResourceCenterP ublicationsGHGEmissionsUSEmissionsInventory2005.html (12 Nov. 2011)Google Scholar
  70. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential in U.S. forestry and Agriculture, EPA 430-R-05-006, Washington, DC, November 2005, Table 2-1, http://www.epa.gov/sequestration/pdf/greenhousegas2005.pdf
  71. Vesterdal L, Ritter E, Gundersen P. 2002. Change in soil organic carbon following afforestation of former arable land. Forest Ecol Manag, 169: 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wang CM, Shao B, Wang RN. 2010a. Carbon sequestration potential of ecosystem of two main tree species in Northeast China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 30(7): 1764–1772. (In Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  73. Wang YG, Li Y, Ye XH, Chu Y, Wang XP. 2010b. Profile storage of organic/inorganic carbon in soil: From forest to desert. Science of the Total Environment, 408: 1925–1931.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Woodall CW, Monleon VJ. 2008. Sampling protocol, estimation, and analysis procedures for the down woody materials indicator of the FIA program. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-22. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 68 pGoogle Scholar
  75. Woodall CW, Heath LS, Smith JE. 2008. National inventories of down and dead woody material forest carbon stocks in the United States: Challenges and opportunities. Forest Ecol Manag, 256: 221–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Woodall CW, Williams MS. 2005. Sampling, estimation, and analysis procedures for the down woody materials indicator. Gen Tech Rep, NC-256.Google Scholar
  77. Woodbury PB, Smith JE, Heath LS. 2007. Carbon sequestration in the U.S. forest sector from 1990 to 2010. Forest Ecol Manag, 241: 14–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Woodbury PB, Heath LS, Smith JE. 2006. Land use change effects on forest carbon cycling throughout the southern USA. J Environ Qual, 35(4): 1348–1363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wu G, Feng ZW. 1995. Study on the biomass of Larix SPP. Forest community in the frigid-temperate zone and the temperate zone of China. Journal of norhteast forestry university, 23(1): 95–101. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  80. Wu QB, Wang XK, Duan XN, Deng LB, Lu F, Ouyang ZY, Feng ZW. 2008. Carbon sequestration and its potential by forest ecosystems in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 28(2): 517–524. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  81. Zerva A, Ball T, Smith KA, Mencuccini M. 2005. Soil carbon dynamics in a Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) chronosequence on a peaty gley. For Ecol Manage, 205: 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhang QZ, Wang CK. 2009. Carbon concentration variability of 10 Chinese temperate tree species. Forest Ecol Manag, 258(5): 722–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zheng DL, Heath LS, Ducey MJ, Smith JE. 2011 Carbon changes in conterminous US forests associated with growth and major disturbances: 1992–2001. Environmental Research Letters, 6(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zhou GY, Liu SG, Li Z, Zhang DQ, Tang XL, Zhou CY, Yan JH, Mo JM. 2006. Old-growth forests can accumulate carbon in soils. Science, 314: 14–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zhou YR, Yu ZL, Zhao SD. 2000. Carbon storage and budget of major Chinese forest types. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 24(5): 518–522 (In Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wei Ma
    • 1
  • Yan-hong Liu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yu-jun Sun
    • 1
  • Jason Grabosky
    • 2
  1. 1.The Key Laboratory of Silviculture and Conservation of the Ministry of Education, College of ForestryBeijing Forestry UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.New Jersey Agricultural Experiment StationRutgers UniversityNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations